Just wanted to address something I read on azcentral:

"Phoenix police Lt. John Collins said the VIP customers indicted this spring rated Desert Divas escorts on the California-based Erotic Review prostitution Web site - an action that authorities said they would prosecute as a felony for supporting a criminal enterprise."

These people were NOT simply posting reviews. They were posting reviews as a means to support the business in question. They were given special rates in exchange for their posts.

What 99.9% of the people do when they review an escort is NOT considered supporting a criminal enterprise."

Besides that, it's all fantasy encounters and such!

How could LE match up the clients at DD with reviews on this site?

The fantasy argument before a judge or jury would be very very weak.   Just like in Scottsdale an escort was convicted by a jury for solicitation solely based on using the term GFE on her website.

Reviews are being used by PD, at this point in wave 1 and 2 for felonies for supporting etc an admitted criminal enterprise.

But they could go after regular customers for solicitation or possibly felony pandering (encouraging others by good reviews).

Yes fortunately there is an issue of accuracy in details etc.  But just saying all reviews are fantasy I doubt would convince any judge or jury.

Its like the silly defense of agency owners that claim they didn't know sex was going on which sunk the D.C. Madam and others.   More than customers however, reviews that suggest sex for money are more often used against escorts. Even worse is what many escort web sites say that brings charges.

So far no customers anywhere that I know of.

The real issue is standing up and fighting the law on which there are many legitimate grounds much stronger than, Oh, all those reviews are just fantasy.

Here is my concern about reviews resulting in felony pandering - do reviews encourage the reviewed gals staying in prostitution?

AZ Pandering law:
Compels, induces or encourages any person to lead a life of prostitution.

Yes its crazy but so are many of the charges such as the gals convicted of money laundering because they received money from customers and laundered it by depositing it into a bank.

>How could LE match up the clients at DD with reviews on this site?

From what I understand some of the "handles" were included in the appt or infamous "list" of 6300+ found and gals for their plea deals may connect reviews with who the guys are.

Further, LE COULD - hasn't yet that I know of but no one would know till later get a Court Order against any review site to get the IP records from their server and trace the IP and than the computer that was on that IP (if rotating- easier if static).

This only proves what computer not who was typing on it but along with any other evidence is probably enough to charge and than its up to a judge/jury/plea deal to get out of it.

Remember charging someone is easy which creates a great deal of trama for the person of course

It is harder to convict.  All of Sheriff Joes cases were tossed although assets were taken from gals under RICO.

Unfortunately the Phoenix PD did a very professional it seems investigation of DD with tons of evidence based on leaders big mouths.  If defendants were not intimidated into the plea bargains uncertain what would happen at trial.

However the DD case against at least those in wave 1 and 2 seem very strong.  Not many can afford $100,000+ of legal fee to go to trial unless they use a public defender.

The case against customers will be harder - but County Attorney is almost promising to do it. As he said on TV yesterday, the investigation is a long way from being over. Just started I believe was the quote.  That is a big concern.  

And another reason we need to find an attorney willing to fight the law itself. But few can afford such an attorney that is really needed that knows Constitutional law and can do a Lawrence vs Texas argument as well as vaguness of Az Law.

Unfortunately the money for time not sex is probably out due to what the gals etc have already said to police.

if you're promoting a prostitute and you're receiving monetary benefit from that promotion, it's pandering.

whether or not you ever met her, is irrelevant.

the original poster is correct.. posting a review is FINE.

profiting from the review is NOT.

which brings up the question. providers may remove their reviews and TER may remove a posters review for a variety of reasons, so can a poster request that his reviews be removed?

Of course you can have all your reviews removed, however, the database has already been downloaded so it's pretty much a moot point.

it would make their job a lot harder if they can't just pull them up on the web and have to dig for them.

For starters, you would have to know precisely what crime Lt Collins was referring to when he said “they would prosecute the reviewers as a felony for supporting a criminal enterprise." Is he referring to aiding and abetting a specific state law criminal act by the agency, or is he talking about a RICO criminal enterprise where the reviewers are being roped in on a RICO conspiracy charge? You really need to see the indictment to understand the precise charge being leveled against the reviewers.

     But the scary thing is that it is not logical to limit the charge to reviewers who gave false reviews in exchange for sex. That would be a crime in and of itself under most state solicitation statutes in that the reviewers gave something of value in exchange for sex. But giving a true review supports the agency just as much. False reviews are a fraud on TER and its members; true and false good reviews support any agency and if the agency is operating a criminal enterprise, criminal liability would seem to follow under the bald statement given by Lt. Collins.

     Hopefully, the indictment will be available online at some point and we can see what is going on here. Until then, it is best not to jump to conclusons.

if you really want to there is software availible that will mirror a site for you. since the pd has essentially unlimted resources its a simple job to just recreate the site on their intranet.

13-3201: Enticement of persons for purpose of prostitution; classification
A person who knowingly entices any other person into a house of prostitution, or elsewhere, for the purpose of prostitution with another person, is guilty of a class 6 felony.

13-3209: Pandering; definitions; methods; classification
A person is guilty of a class 5 felony who knowingly:

1. Places any person in the charge or custody of any other person for purposes of prostitution.

2. Places any person in a house of prostitution with the intent that such person lead a life of prostitution.

3. Compels, induces or encourages any person to reside with that person, or with any other person, for the purpose of prostitution.

4. Compels, induces or encourages any person to lead a life of prostitution.

Can you tell us what that software is called?
Has it been reported that police did this?

13-3201 and 13-3209 both have "knowingly" in their definition. The person has to have had an intention for enticement of persons in 13-3201.

It would a stretch to prove a reviewer knew that a positive review would knowingly entice any other person into a house of prostitution, or elsewhere, for the purpose of prostitution with another person.

The major purpose of these reviews is to discourage people from seeing providers who do not provide good companionship experiences. It is to warn people of criminals, frauds and those who use false advertising.

While reviewers may say "I would see this person again" it is very rare that people say "You should see this person." "YMMV" is a common expression in reviews.

two are built into the linux kernal even.

it hasnt been reported but then why would the police need to report that they mirrored the public sections of a website for internal use?

who would they even need to report that too?

wget for linux is the one im most familar with
theres webripper and winwsd on the M$ side.

all are free and fairly easy to use i would have to assume the it dept of maricopa county could do it in a matter of hours or certainly days.

None of those will do the job.
What's the first layer they would have to overcome on this site? If you are legit, you can tell by looking.
PS... mr. BS... I'm in FLA now, but did 6 years IT consultancy (no one in house has the skill ANYWHERE in that county) AZSC, ASHD, MCSO as well as Pima an Mohave. Your assumptions are idiotic.
But just to be sure, why don't we contact TER directly and ask how vulnerable they think they are?
Time to google, buddy!

security isnt my forte however i know enough of the basics to know if i had a legit user/pass which i could purchase for 30 dollars in two minutes i could easily compromise the database. why are you assuming a blackhat activity here? theres no need for any.

all you would really need to do is just make a bunch of poor bastards sit down and copy every single review of the ladies involved since you can have multiple workstations logged in with the same account.
hell for that matter im willing to bet good money they have always had working accounts since you dont need to be all that astute to realize every pd in the country knows of this sites existence and sees it as a great resource to snag the low hanging fruit when they need some.

Even the maricopa county it dept could click a hotlink and use save as. For that matter if i were interested in fishing later i would copy every single review that i can find....

there no need to use cross site or certificate games  when sweat equity works just as well now is there?

i doubt a judge would even exclude evidence obtained this way since its freely available to anyone eula or not.

its entirely possible the police dept has asked the florida pd for a copy of the backups as of elms arrest last year since they did seize those you may recall.

honestly your just a rude piece of crap arent you.

Just to be clear... are we saying that anyone who has posted "reviews" on this site would be under scrutiny - or only those who have some connection to DD?

At this point in time only people who posted reviews on DD and paid with a credit card and used their real name are likely to come under scrutiny by the police.

If you did not post a review and you paid in cash and the DD records do not have your real name then it is going to be very difficult for LE to make any connection to you.

After these cases go through the system, and the courts uphold using reviews as proof that a crime was committed, then there is a chance that LE might try this with independents.

Independents only take cash and never keep detailed records so even if LE does bust independents there would not be much they could use.

I suspect that this is an effort to destroy the agencies - if it works here it will be done in other cities.

The most likely result unfortunately is they will scare everyone into plea deals and it will not go to Court.

Then PD can do whatever they want and get more aggressive with indies etc., If we don't stop this witch hunt in the Courts.

But it will take clients with lots of money for good attorneys and willing they may be in the public view if they fight it.

I think using reviews is a huge stretch of freedom of speech etc at least without the paper trial that sadly was so good at DD.  

But getting an indictment is easy.  Scaring people into confessions for a plea deal is easily.  Actually standing up and fighting in Court is very hard, sadly.

Unfortunately, you are probably correct in assuming that TER "site security" could be compromised if the powers that be are willing to put in the time, the money, and the effort.

However, as of yet, no one knows for certain if reviews are to be used as probable cause for arrest or if the court will allow reviews to be admitted as evidence. This will have a a tremdeous baring on everyone involved in this witch hunt.

Mobby, darling, for now it would be safest if we all assumed that LE has complete access to everything that's posted. Don't you agree?

Warmest regards,

Sheika Fatima
[email protected]